Jones writes, “So which is the bigger anniversary? The smart bet might seem to be Rembrandt. His art is so absorbing, tragic and inward”. By the end of the essay, Jones declares daVinci’s anniversary...

Jones writes, “So which is the bigger anniversary? The smart bet might seem to be Rembrandt. His art is so absorbing, tragic and inward”.

By the end of the essay, Jones declares daVinci’s anniversary the bigger one despite his point that Rembrandt’s art is “so absorbing, tragic, and inward.” What criteria does he use to compare the two artists’ works that leads him to this conclusion?

What assumptions do you have about what constitutes good art, and where do those assumptions come from? Based on your own assumptions, do you find yourself agreeing or disagreeing with Jones’s conclusion?